Based on this it sounds like the ram allocation is the same as the PS4. So 3.5 I guess?
I was concerned that such a rich level of functionality may well be taking system resources away from the game developer, whether that's in terms of CPU time, GPU or memory. Sony isn't giving away any numbers on what the system allocation is, and neither is it confirming how much useable space is available on the SSD. However, the aim is to deliver the new features with the same kind of system allocation developers currently work with on current-gen platforms.
"Hardware resource is limited and defined, and it's shared between the game and our system side," confirms Hideaki Nishino. "We define how much of the resource can be spent by the system side, but it's a similar amount [to] what we are doing with PlayStation 4. That's a philosophical thing: we are trying to give as much power and resource as possible back to the game side, because the game is the core, and then we bring Control Centre and Activity Cards while minimising the [system] resources we spend."
Our first look at the PlayStation 5 user interface - and it could be a game-changer
When was the last time we saw a game-changing reveal in the immediate run-up to the launch of a next generation console…www.eurogamer.net
For everyone saying, "well I'd much rather the extra 1 GB go to games, so I'm happy"...can you explain to me how that makes any sense since the PS5 has a 4K Dashboard and the games are performing slightly better on it even for the most part?
The PS5 Dashboard is also a skeleton of a system UI, like, it's about the minimum level of function you could possibly expect of a console. It's a silly comparison.For everyone saying, "well I'd much rather the extra 1 GB go to games, so I'm happy"...can you explain to me how that makes any sense since the PS5 has a 4K Dashboard and the games are performing slightly better on it even for the most part?
To be fair, the UX on Xbox One suffered because it ran on a mobile processor and an HDD while being heavily depended on the network.The dashboard and ui are finally quick and snappy. I wouldn't want to risk ruining that.
Fair enough, but don't jinx it!To be fair, the UX on Xbox One suffered because it ran on a mobile processor and an HDD while being heavily depended on the network.
If they somehow manage to make the UI on a Zen 2 12TF machine with an SSD slow I will laugh for days :P
How so? They are both very flawed IMO and could use a ton of improvements. One of my biggest pet peeves with Xbox is how they only show a handful of recent games up top, for all of your installed games you have to navigate to sub menu. And what's up with "suggested games" group which isn't removable? What's the point of showing some random games from my library, some of them installed, while others not installed.I can't believe I'm saying this but even at 1080p the Xbox Ui is miles ahead of whatever that PS5 UI is.
I still notice occasional lag after cold boot when navigating.The dashboard and ui are finally quick and snappy. I wouldn't want to risk ruining that.
I mean, you can pin whatever games you want on xbox, and the library is only like one click away from anywhere. You don't have to scroll all the way to the right first.How so? They are both very flawed IMO and could use a ton of improvements. One of my biggest pet peeves with Xbox is how they only show a handful of recent games up top, for all of your installed games you have to navigate to sub menu. And what's up with "suggested games" group which isn't removable? What's the point of showing some random games from my library, some of them installed, while others not installed.
PS5 isn't that much better, has its own share of annoyances.
I still notice occasional lag after cold boot when navigating.
I won't! Knock on wood.
Pinning feature is pretty terrible because games that you uninstall still remain pinned, so I ended up micro managing these pesky thumbnails all the time. I gave up on using that and now just go to "my games & apps" where I can actually see currently installed games and nothing else.I mean, you can pin whatever games you want on xbox, and the library is only like one click away from anywhere. You don't have to scroll all the way to the right first.
Ok? So what's your beef I guess? Literally 'down' 'a' like, short of them dedicating a button on the controller to opening your library that's about as fast as you can expect anything to be.Pinning feature is pretty terrible because games that you uninstall still remain pinned, so I ended up micro managing these pesky thumbnails all the time. I gave up on using that and now just go to "my games & apps" where I can actually see currently installed games and nothing else.
Pinning feature is pretty terrible because games that you uninstall still remain pinned, so I ended up micro managing these pesky thumbnails all the time. I gave up on using that and now just go to "my games & apps" where I can actually see currently installed games and nothing else.
Ofc you do on a big 4K tv
I don't remember Sony divulging how much RAM is available for games though. They're probably using more RAM for the OS than the 2.5 MS using for theirs.
Can someone with a better understanding of rasterization please explain to me how rendering what looks like mostly simple, non-shaded 2D shapes in 4K vs 1080p would consume an additional 1GB of RAM?
It's a 7 year console cycle. Can you explain why you expect all hardware resources to be fully utilized in the first few months?
The common consensus around the PS5's (current) superior performance is that it's down to much more mature dev tools.
Thanks, this is super insightful and extremely detailed. I've very little to virtually no experience with teams working on UWA apps or developing UIs for Windows using XAML, but this all makes sense as explained. Really appreciate you taking the time to type it all out.The biggest reason is that unlike the PlayStation's and Xbox 360 before it, the X1 /XS don't use a purpose built, dedicated UI layer for the console, and instead uses a **very* general purpose UI layer (UWP XAML) that is optimised for general UI development and doesn't - and won't - have any specific low level, case by case optimisation.
It means its less efficient overall in terms of performance and RAM usage, but it also means its ridiculously easier and quicker for Microsoft to iterate and change their UI because they're using a mature and fully fledged UI stack with a lot of tooling, documentation and flexibility, and their developers have a lotmof experience with it. (The Windows 10 shell is even built with UWP XAML these days)
And every layer / element on the UI gets its own render texture rather than being flattened on top of each other. So even a simple game tile has a BGRA background image texture, an A8 texture for the text label and a texture BGRA texture for a colour behind the label that get placed on top of each each other, rather than creating a single composite texture.
Which makes sense for a general purpose UI system because we don't know who needs to be redrawn when, and don't want the cost of redrawing entire cascading trees constantly, but means when you increase resolution, you can get a lot of potential memory increase - but not even close to 1GB from XAML elements alone. The biggest increase is probably literally from the resolution of the bitmap image assets like game art and full screen background art - and the of course, all the apps would also render in 4K with their own increased memory usage, taking up parts of the allocated Windows side of the memory pool
It is, however, literally a case of them flipping a switch to get it to happen for the most part. XAML was designed even in the old WPF days to scale perfectly with DPI/ resolution, so if they told it to render at 4K right now, it would, with very little work.
This tbhIt's the least of my issues tbh. If they change it then great, but I honestly couldn't possibly care less
The flat design makes it more strange. It should be very easily designed by scalable objects like in any other GUI for phones or computers.Tbh with it being a flat design a flat design I don't even notice it that much.
Ofc a crisper display would be nice but it impacts me in no way what so ever. If their alleged performance benefits/gains then even better.
For everyone saying, "well I'd much rather the extra 1 GB go to games, so I'm happy"...can you explain to me how that makes any sense since the PS5 has a 4K Dashboard and the games are performing slightly better on it even for the most part?
So PS5 is providing less RAM for games but still matching and sometimes exceeding XSX performance? PS5 is a beast!
So your argument is that over time the extra GB saved will cause Series X games to perform better? I don't buy that at all.
I know like 10% of those specific terms but somehow you explained it super well... impressive!The biggest reason is that unlike the PlayStation's and Xbox 360 before it, the X1 /XS don't use a purpose built, dedicated UI layer for the console, and instead uses a **very* general purpose UI layer (UWP XAML) that is optimised for general UI development and doesn't - and won't - have any specific low level, case by case optimisation.
It means its less efficient overall in terms of performance and RAM usage, but it also means its ridiculously easier and quicker for Microsoft to iterate and change their UI because they're using a mature and fully fledged UI stack with a lot of tooling, documentation and flexibility, and their developers have a lotmof experience with it. (The Windows 10 shell is even built with UWP XAML these days)
And every layer / element on the UI gets its own render texture rather than being flattened on top of each other. So even a simple game tile has a BGRA background image texture, an A8 texture for the text label and a texture BGRA texture for a colour behind the label that get placed on top of each each other, rather than creating a single composite texture.
Which makes sense for a general purpose UI system because we don't know who needs to be redrawn when, and don't want the cost of redrawing entire cascading trees constantly, but means when you increase resolution, you can get a lot of potential memory increase - but not even close to 1GB from XAML elements alone. The biggest increase is probably literally from the resolution of the bitmap image assets like game art and full screen background art - and the of course, all the apps would also render in 4K with their own increased memory usage, taking up parts of the allocated Windows side of the memory pool
It is, however, literally a case of them flipping a switch to get it to happen for the most part. XAML was designed even in the old WPF days to scale perfectly with DPI/ resolution, so if they told it to render at 4K right now, it would, with very little work.